Page 308 - Week 01 - Thursday, 14 February 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
traffic now. It would have been open to traffic for a long time and the people of Tharwa would not have waited 512 days with the prospect now of another six to nine months to wait. This has been a textbook example of how not to manage a process.
However Mr Hargreaves now tries to spin it, whatever spin he gives Mr Mulcahy or Dr Foskey in briefings to the effect that this has been well handled and really the government had no option, it is clear that the decision they have taken now to restore the bridge is a decision that could have been taken in the first place. If this decision had been taken in the first place we would not have had the 512 days delay to date, not to mention the additional uncertainty that existed before the 512 days, the on-and-off nature in relation to the bridge.
If the government had made the decision that Mr Stanhope has now had to make in coming over the top of his minister then the people of Tharwa would have had a bridge much, much sooner—a restored bridge, a historically significant bridge. Occasionally it is reasonable for a government simply to admit that they got it wrong. It is not that hard. Just say: “Look, we got it wrong. If we had been on the ball, if we had been on our game, this would not have happened. We would not have had this fiasco of this bridge being closed for 512 days with all the social dislocation that goes with that for the Tharwa community.”
Mr Hargreaves can be dismissive of the Tharwa community because there are not a lot of voters in Tharwa. But that does not make them any less Canberran. They are part of our community. They are a part of the ACT. The dismissive attitude of Mr Hargreaves and Dr Foskey is regrettable. It is regrettable that this government simply cannot look at the facts and say: “We got it wrong. If we had actually listened to the community in the first place or if we had made the right decision in the first place, we would not have this situation. The people of Tharwa would not have suffered as they have.”
I think the full embarrassment came when the Chief Minister made the announcement while Mr Hargreaves was on holiday. I do not know whether that was arranged or whether that was because the Chief Minister did not want to further embarrass Mr Hargreaves in coming in over the top of the minister on this issue and making that announcement. For him to make that announcement with Minister Hargreaves on holidays demonstrates that he wanted to distance himself from this process and that he wanted to distance himself from the minister’s performance in this area.
It was clearly a vote of no confidence in this minister. Whether the Chief Minister will acknowledge that or not, it was. It can’t be seen in any other light. The media coverage on the issue exactly reflected that. The other message that came through, and in fact it has been repeated here by Mr Hargreaves, is to blame the Tharwa community. It is never his fault—
Mr Hargreaves: I have never done that.
MR SESELJA: You have. Again today, you were saying—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .